Monday, October 10, 2016

BOWLING GREEN KY - A NEIGHBOR'S 5 PIT BULLS JUMPED A FENCE AND MAULED A GERMAN SHEPHERD, CHASED A MAN WHO JUMPED ON TOP OF A TRAMPOLINE, ATTACKED AN OFFICER AND THEN BEGAN FIGHTING EACH OTHER

A Bowling Green woman was charged with five counts of harboring vicious animals Monday after her FIVE PIT BULLS jumped a fence, attacked a neighbor's German shepherd and had a man cornered on a trampoline.

At 1:25 p.m., Bowling Green police officers were called to the 1700 block of Holly Drive after the dogs jumped a fence from 1705 Holly Drive and attacked a 3-year-old German shepherd that was severely injured, according to the citation. When officers arrived, they found Hector Morphin standing on a trampoline, stranded in an attempt to protect himself from the dogs.

The shepherd was so badly injured that it may not survive, according to the citation.

A police officer was trying to get Morphin to safety when one of the dogs attacked the officer. The officer emptied his can of OC spray on the dog but it did not stop the dog. The officer then had to use his asp baton to strike the pit bull to free both the officer and Morphin, according to the citation and Capt. Matt Edwards.

"Once the officers got the citizen free, they withdrew and animal control took the dogs into custody," Edwards said.

In addition to injuring the shepherd, the pit bulls also turned on each other during the attack, suffering injuries.

Animal control officers responded from both the city and the county, Edwards said. Three of the pit bulls had to be tranquilized and two others that had run from the pack were captured and leashed. All of the dogs were taken to the Bowling Green-Warren County Humane Society.

I'm sorry, but the part about the pit bulls turning on each other cracks me up! Yeah, they was just playin', right nutter Roseanna Phelps?

Having a pack of pit bulls should be illegal. But that would be Breed Specific Legislation, and that's racist. I'm just using all of the inane arguments nutters like to spew.

The seriousness of the attack though, really illustrates why pit bulls are dangerous, should be regulated, and do not belong in polite society. The dog fighters' dog of choice is not a pet. That's why pit bulls randomly fight ordinary dogs, attack police officers, and each other. Pit bulls are not normal dogs. Pit bulls are not pets.

THE CODE OF ALABAMA - 1975

Title: 6 CIVIL PRACTICE

Section 6-5-120

Defined.

A "nuisance" is anything that works hurt, inconvenience or damage to another. The fact that the act done may otherwise be lawful does not keep it from being a nuisance. The inconvenience complained of must not be fanciful or such as would affect only one of a fastidious taste, but it should be such as would affect an ordinary reasonable man.

(Code 1907, §5193; Code 1923, §9271; Code 1940, T. 7, §1081

Section 6-5-121

_____________________

Distinction between public and private nuisances; right of action generally.

Nuisances are either public or private. A public nuisance is one which damages all persons who come within the sphere of its operation, though it may vary in its effects on individuals. A private nuisance is one limited in its injurious effects to one or a few individuals. Generally, a public nuisance gives no right of action to any individual, but must be abated by a process instituted in the name of the state. A private nuisance gives a right of action to the person injured.

Use of force in defense of a person.

(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he or she may use a degree of force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force, and is legally presumed to be justified in using deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another person pursuant to subdivision (4), if the person reasonably believes that another person is:

(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force.

(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling.

(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape, or forcible sodomy.

(4) In the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcefully entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is in the process of sabotaging or attempting to sabotage a federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is attempting to remove, or has forcefully removed, a person against his or her will from any dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle when the person has a legal right to be there, and provided that the person using the deadly physical force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring. The legal presumption that a person using deadly physical force is justified to do so pursuant to this subdivision does not apply if:

a. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner or lessee, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;

b. The person sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used;

c. The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

d. The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his or her official duties.

(b) A person who is justified under subsection (a) in using physical force, including deadly physical force, and who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and is in any place where he or she has the right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a person is not justified in using physical force if:

(1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, he or she provoked the use of unlawful physical force by such other person.

(2) He or she was the initial aggressor, except that his or her use of physical force upon another person under the circumstances is justifiable if he or she withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his or her intent to do so, but the latter person nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force.

(3) The physical force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.

(d) A person who uses force, including deadly physical force, as justified and permitted in this section is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the force was determined to be unlawful.

(e) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force described in subsection (a), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.